Citation Nr: 9918005
Decision Date: 06/30/99 Archive Date: 07/07/99
DOCKET NO. 94-40 243 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO)
in New York, New York
THE ISSUES
1. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to
reopen a claim for service connection for a left eye
disorder.
2. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to
reopen a claim for service connection for a nasal
disorder.
3. Entitlement to service connection for a post-traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD).
4. Entitlement to an increased rating for bilateral pes
planus, currently evaluated as 10% disabling.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: The American Legion
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Thomas A. Pluta, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran has active service from March 1953 to February
1955. This appeal arises from a July 1992 rating action
which denied service connection for a left eye disorder, and
a May 1994 rating action which denied service connection for
a nasal disorder, in each case on the grounds that new and
material evidence had not been submitted to reopen the claim.
This appeal also arises from a February 1997 rating action
which denied service connection for PTSD, and which granted
an increased rating from 0% to 10% for bilateral pes planus;
the veteran appeals the 10% rating as inadequate.
REMAND
In September 1998, the veteran requested a hearing before a
Member of the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) at the RO.
Instead, by letter of January 1999, the RO notified the
veteran of a hearing that had been scheduled for him before a
hearing officer at the RO for a date in March 1999. In
February 1999, the veteran canceled the RO hearing scheduled
for March 1999.
By letter of April 1999, the Board notified the veteran of a
hearing before a Member of the Board that had been scheduled
for him at his request in Washington, D.C. for a date in late
June 1999. In May 1999, a communication was received from
the veteran wherein he stated that he was unable to attend a
Board hearing in Washington, D.C. A Board Contact Report
dated in early June 1999 indicates that the veteran's
representative was contacted and stated that the veteran was
unable to attend the Board hearing scheduled for late June
1999 in Washington, D.C., but requested clarification as to
whether the veteran wanted a hearing before a Member of the
Board at the RO. By letter of early June 1999, the Board
requested the veteran to clarify whether he wanted to attend
the hearing before a Member of the Board which had been
scheduled for a date in late June 1999 in Washington, D.C.,
or whether he would not be able to attend the scheduled
hearing in Washington, D.C. and instead wanted a hearing
before a Member of the Board at the RO, or whether he no
longer wanted a hearing. The veteran responded in mid-June
1999 that would not be able to appear for the scheduled
hearing in Washington, D.C., and instead requested a hearing
before a Member of the Board at the RO. Under the
circumstances, this case is REMANDED to the RO for the
following action:
The RO should schedule, at the first
convenient opportunity, a hearing for the
veteran and any witnesses before a Member
of the Board traveling to the RO for the
purpose of conducting such hearings.
After the hearing has been held, the case should be returned
directly to the Board for further consideration. No further
action on the part of the RO is required with respect to the
issues on appeal. The RO need not readjudicate the claims,
and a Supplemental Statement of the Case need not be issued.
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO.
The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the
Board or the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
(Court) for additional development or other appropriate
action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See The
Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-
446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A. § 5101
(West Supp. 1999) (Historical and Statutory Notes). In
addition, VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1, Part
IV, directs the ROs to provide
expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by
the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44-
8.45 and 38.02-38.03.
BRUCE E. HYMAN
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991& Supp. 1999), only a
decision of the Board is appealable to the Court. This
remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not
constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your
appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1998).